Wikipedia:Peer review/King's College London/archive1

King's College London[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it has the potential to become a GA. It has undergone major changes since the last nominations in 2007-08. I look forward to constructive suggestions and remarks which can help take this article towards a GA.

Thanks very much, Merlaysamuel : Speechify 08:48, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: This nomination for peer review looks premature. There is basic work to be done before it is ready, in particular:

The lead is supposed to be a broad summary of the contents of the article, not a collection of facts. The detailed statistical information should be given in the body of the article, and cited there.
The History section looks thin and incomplete.
The article is seriously under-referenced. The "Campus" section has scarely any references, and other sections e.g. History, have many uncited statements
Nearly all the sources are online. What steps have been taken to research literature (books, articles etc) that might deal objectively with aspects of the College?
In addition, the article appears to be overdependent on sources belonging to Kings College itself.
Reference formatting requires standardising, and there is at least one dead link
The prose does not look well organised, with rather too many single-sentence paragraphs.

I think you need to study one of the "College" articles that has made it to GA, and see if you can work up this one to that standard. I reommend Jesus College, Oxford. Brianboulton (talk) 00:22, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestions Brianboulton. I will take them one by one and work on it. Many thanks.--Merlaysamuel : Speechify 10:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]